[Vision2020] Re: Constitutionial Ban on Gay Marriage
Douglas Stambler
ccm_moscow@yahoo.com
Thu, 31 Jul 2003 20:34:20 -0700 (PDT)
--0-1156247986-1059708860=:19734
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
nice, donovan. thanks for running with this topic - it is all over the news today.
-douglas stambler
Donovan Arnold <donovanarnold@hotmail.com> wrote:
McClellan said,"The president is strongly committed to protecting the
sanctity of marriage and defending a sacred institution that he believes is
a between a man and a woman" "We are looking at what may be needed in the
context of the court cases that are pending now."
Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't the statement "sanctity of marriage and
defending a sacred institution" already gone!?!
I mean really, you want to defend marriage, why not start with ending the
80% of adultery, the 50% divorce rate after five years and the 72% divorce
rate after ten years? I mean when something is MAYBE ten percent of your
problem and something else is 72% of your problem, shouldn't you concentrate
your efforts on the 72%?
I guess this just goes to show how arrogant and stupid the people are that
oppose even Civil Unions. I don't think this amendment has a snowball's
chance in hell, which is good. I shutter at the prospect of this country
passing an amendment that singles out a group of people to be denied the
right to marry. Marriage is no more a sacred institution, it just a tax
break, and why deny people a tax break because of what they do in their
bedrooms? That is just plain wrong.
Donovan J Arnold
>From: Douglas Stambler
>To: vision2020@moscow.com
>Subject: [Vision2020] Article: "White House Mulls Constitution Ban on Gay
>Marriage"
>Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:54:10 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
>
>(Reuters Photo) White House Mulls Constitution Ban on Gay Marriage
>
>
>
>
>July 31
>— By Randall Mikkelsen
>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration would consider seeking a
>constitutional amendment to ensure a ban on same-sex marriages, a White
>House spokesman said on Thursday.
>
>Spokesman Scott McClellan said President Bush, who on Wednesday said
>administration lawyers were studying ways to ban gay marriages, also was
>opposed to civil unions as an alternative.
>
>
>
>Asked about the possibility of a constitutional amendment, McClellan said,
>"obviously that is something to look at in this context."
>
>Any administration action would depend on the outcome of pending court
>cases on the gay-marriage issue, he said.
>
>"The president is strongly committed to protecting the sanctity of marriage
>and defending a sacred institution that he believes is a between a man and
>a woman," McClellan said. "We are looking at what may be needed in the
>context of the court cases that are pending now."
>
>Bush also opposed legalization of homosexual civil unions, which are
>allowed in Vermont, McClellan said. He cited Bush's support for current
>federal law, which holds that states do not have to recognize such civil
>unions granted by another state.
>
>The gay-rights group Human Rights Campaign on Wednesday criticized the
>president's stance, saying it suggests "further codifying discrimination."
>
>Debate over the issue of same-sex unions has intensified since Canada has
>taken steps to legalize gay marriages and the U.S. Supreme Court in June
>struck down state sodomy laws. Conservative critics say the Supreme Court's
>ruling could open the door to same-sex marriages in the United States.
>
>The 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, signed by former Democratic President
>Bill Clinton, defines marriage for federal purposes as between one woman
>and one man. Gay marriages are forbidden in the United States.
>
>Bush said on Wednesday he would not compromise his belief in the "sanctity
>of marriage."
>
>But, as recently as earlier this month, he said a constitutional ban on gay
>marriage proposed in the House of Representatives might not be necessary
>despite the high court's decision.
>
>Any proposal to amend the constitution faces high hurdles. To be
>successful, it must be approved by two-thirds of the House and the Senate
>and ratified by three-quarters of the states.
>
>When asked his views of homosexuality on Wednesday, Bush said "we're all
>sinners," but McClellan said this should not be interpreted as a belief
>that homosexuality was a sin.
>
>He noted that Bush's questioner began by saying many of the president's
>supporters thought homosexuality was immoral. Bush's response expressed a
>conviction that it was "not his place" to judge others, McClellan said.
>
>
>photo credit and caption: President George W. Bush answers a reporter's
>question during a morning press conference in the Rose Garden at the White
>House in Washington, July 30, 2003. Bush on Wednesday rejected same sex
>marriage but declined to pass moral judgment on homosexuality, saying he
>was "mindful that we're all sinners." Paraphrasing the Bible, Bush told
>reporters "I caution those who may try to take the speck out of the
>neighbor's eye when they've got a log in their own." Photo by Gary
>Hershorn/Reuters
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Do you Yahoo!?
>SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
--0-1156247986-1059708860=:19734
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
<DIV>nice, donovan. thanks for running with this topic - it is all over the news today.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-douglas stambler<BR><BR><B><I>Donovan Arnold <donovanarnold@hotmail.com></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid; WIDTH: 100%"><BR>McClellan said,"The president is strongly committed to protecting the <BR>sanctity of marriage and defending a sacred institution that he believes is <BR>a between a man and a woman" "We are looking at what may be needed in the <BR>context of the court cases that are pending now."<BR><BR>Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't the statement "sanctity of marriage and <BR>defending a sacred institution" already gone!?!<BR><BR>I mean really, you want to defend marriage, why not start with ending the <BR>80% of adultery, the 50% divorce rate after five years and the 72% divorce <BR>rate after ten years? I mean when something is MAYBE ten percent of your <BR>problem and something else is 72% of your problem, shouldn't you concentrate <BR>your efforts on the 72%?<BR><BR>I guess this just goes to show how arrogant and stupid the people are that <BR>oppose even Civil Unions. I don't!
think
this amendment has a snowball's <BR>chance in hell, which is good. I shutter at the prospect of this country <BR>passing an amendment that singles out a group of people to be denied the <BR>right to marry. Marriage is no more a sacred institution, it just a tax <BR>break, and why deny people a tax break because of what they do in their <BR>bedrooms? That is just plain wrong.<BR><BR>Donovan J Arnold<BR><BR>>From: Douglas Stambler <CCM_MOSCOW@YAHOO.COM><BR>>To: vision2020@moscow.com<BR>>Subject: [Vision2020] Article: "White House Mulls Constitution Ban on Gay <BR>>Marriage"<BR>>Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:54:10 -0700 (PDT)<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>(Reuters Photo) White House Mulls Constitution Ban on Gay Marriage<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>July 31<BR>>— By Randall Mikkelsen<BR>>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration would consider seeking a <BR>>constitutional amendment to ensure a ban on same-sex marriages, a White <BR>>House
spokesman said on Thursday.<BR>><BR>>Spokesman Scott McClellan said President Bush, who on Wednesday said <BR>>administration lawyers were studying ways to ban gay marriages, also was <BR>>opposed to civil unions as an alternative.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>Asked about the possibility of a constitutional amendment, McClellan said, <BR>>"obviously that is something to look at in this context."<BR>><BR>>Any administration action would depend on the outcome of pending court <BR>>cases on the gay-marriage issue, he said.<BR>><BR>>"The president is strongly committed to protecting the sanctity of marriage <BR>>and defending a sacred institution that he believes is a between a man and <BR>>a woman," McClellan said. "We are looking at what may be needed in the <BR>>context of the court cases that are pending now."<BR>><BR>>Bush also opposed legalization of homosexual civil unions, which are <BR>>allowed in Vermont, McClellan sai!
d. He
cited Bush's support for current <BR>>federal law, which holds that states do not have to recognize such civil <BR>>unions granted by another state.<BR>><BR>>The gay-rights group Human Rights Campaign on Wednesday criticized the <BR>>president's stance, saying it suggests "further codifying discrimination."<BR>><BR>>Debate over the issue of same-sex unions has intensified since Canada has <BR>>taken steps to legalize gay marriages and the U.S. Supreme Court in June <BR>>struck down state sodomy laws. Conservative critics say the Supreme Court's <BR>>ruling could open the door to same-sex marriages in the United States.<BR>><BR>>The 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, signed by former Democratic President <BR>>Bill Clinton, defines marriage for federal purposes as between one woman <BR>>and one man. Gay marriages are forbidden in the United States.<BR>><BR>>Bush said on Wednesday he would not compromise his belief in the "sanctity <B!
R>>of
marriage."<BR>><BR>>But, as recently as earlier this month, he said a constitutional ban on gay <BR>>marriage proposed in the House of Representatives might not be necessary <BR>>despite the high court's decision.<BR>><BR>>Any proposal to amend the constitution faces high hurdles. To be <BR>>successful, it must be approved by two-thirds of the House and the Senate <BR>>and ratified by three-quarters of the states.<BR>><BR>>When asked his views of homosexuality on Wednesday, Bush said "we're all <BR>>sinners," but McClellan said this should not be interpreted as a belief <BR>>that homosexuality was a sin.<BR>><BR>>He noted that Bush's questioner began by saying many of the president's <BR>>supporters thought homosexuality was immoral. Bush's response expressed a <BR>>conviction that it was "not his place" to judge others, McClellan said.<BR>><BR>><BR>>photo credit and caption: President George W. Bush answers a reporte!
r's
<BR>>question during a morning press conference in the Rose Garden at the White <BR>>House in Washington, July 30, 2003. Bush on Wednesday rejected same sex <BR>>marriage but declined to pass moral judgment on homosexuality, saying he <BR>>was "mindful that we're all sinners." Paraphrasing the Bible, Bush told <BR>>reporters "I caution those who may try to take the speck out of the <BR>>neighbor's eye when they've got a log in their own." Photo by Gary <BR>>Hershorn/Reuters<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>---------------------------------<BR>>Do you Yahoo!?<BR>>SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!<BR><BR>_________________________________________________________________<BR>STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* <BR>http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><p><hr SIZE=1>
Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://pa.yahoo.com/*http://rd.yahoo.com/evt=1207/*http://promo.yahoo.com/sbc/">SBC Yahoo! DSL</a> - Now only $29.95 per month!
--0-1156247986-1059708860=:19734--